Talk:Telecommunications
 | Please use the archive parameter to specify the number of the next free peer review page, or replace {{Peer review}} on this page with {{subst:PR}} to find the next free page automatically. |
 Archives |
|---|
Hi Light current,
Please stop reverting the talk page at telecommunication. None of the issues from the old talk page seem relevant to the current article (which is why they have been archived). If there is a particular issue you feel is still relevant just copy it across from the archive.
Cedars 05:31, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
- There is no reason at all to archive. It tends to hide what people have said recently. But of course if thats your intention....8-(--Light current 13:42, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Radio and TV
Radio and TV are not telecommunication as signals only pass one way. These are broadcast systems. Your defn specifies exchange of info.
The word telecommunication was adapted from the French word télécommunication. It is a compound of the Greek prefix tele- (τηλε-), meaning 'far off', and communication, meaning 'exchange of information'.[2]
my bolding --Light current 15:28, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
- The definition you highlighted was that of communication. If your argument was accepted this would make your term "broadcast communication" an oxymoron. I would suggest broadcast communication is a subset of telecommunications as implied in the article. Both broadcast and point-to-point communication are based on similar technical foundations. Cedars 00:29, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
I meant broadcast systems. --Light current 00:53, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
- Look changing what you have written to substantiate some argument you are attempting to make is not going to work. The discussion of broadcast communication fits within the telecommunication article. Can you not think of any other suggestions on how to improve the article? Cedars 00:58, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
"Broadcast communication" an oxymoron--Light current 01:01, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
- Broadcast communication is widely used (see Haykin). There is no need to remove this content. Cedars 01:10, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
Could you give more info on Haykin?--Light current 03:28, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
Improvement plan
To try to get this article upto GA status, I suggest we first remove all refs to TV and radio!--Light current 23:56, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
- I would rather we did not. Cedars 00:29, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
Y not?--Light current 00:37, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
- See comments above. Cedars 00:43, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
Sorry I think radio and TV have to go! If you can justify keeping them in accordance with the defn on the page, then I will be pleased to let them stay. Otherwise.. tick... tick--Light current 01:05, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
Great. I've already done that so there will be no need to remove the content. I was worried this might turn out to be like electrical engineering. Cedars 01:12, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
- Actually, in retrospect, I hate arguing with you. It really makes Wikipedia no fun to work on at all. The problem as I see it is, be it electrical engineering or telecommunications, there is no concrete definition of the term. So try to think of a way both our viewpoints can be represented in the article. Removing all the radio and television would only result in more edit wars - which would really suck. Cedars 01:58, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
Well my definition and most peoples is that telcomms does not include broadcast radio and TV. Why not set up a poll to find out?--Light current 03:30, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
- I don't want to have a poll. I want to write a good article. But if you want to write an alternate version of the page, I guess we can put it to a poll. Cedars 05:07, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
Lets wait for a few more comments from others first. 8-|--Light current 05:16, 4 August 2006 (UTC)